Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37991141›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2024

Diagnosis of focal liver lesions from ultrasound images using a pretrained residual neural network.

Sutthirak Tangruangkiat, Napatsorn Chaiwongkot, Chayanon Pamarapa, Thanatcha Rawangwong, Araya Khunnarong, Chanyanuch Chainarong, Preeyanun Sathapanawanthana, Pantajaree Hiranrat, Ruedeerat Keerativittayayut, Witaya Sungkarat and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Sutthirak TangruangkiatSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Napatsorn ChaiwongkotSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chayanon PamarapaSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thanatcha RawangwongSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Araya KhunnarongSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chanyanuch ChainarongSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Preeyanun SathapanawanthanaSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pantajaree HiranratSonographer School, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Ruedeerat KeerativittayayutSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Witaya SungkaratSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Monchai PhonlakraiSchool of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Science Technology, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7335-426X

Funding

Faculty of Health Science Technology, HRH Princess Chulabhorn College of Medical Science, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Thailand HST2565/0012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aims to develop a ResNet50-based deep learning model for focal liver lesion (FLL) classification in ultrasound images, comparing its performance with other models and prior research. METHODOLOGY: We retrospectively collected 581 ultrasound images from the Chulabhorn Hospital's HCC surveillance and screening project (2010-2018). The dataset comprised five classes: non-FLL, hepatic cyst (Cyst), hemangioma (HMG), focal fatty sparing (FFS), and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We conducted 5-fold cross-validation after random dataset partitioning, enhancing training data with data augmentation. Our models used modified pre-trained ResNet50, GGN, ResNet18, and VGG16 architectures. Model performance, assessed via confusion matrices for sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, was compared across models and with prior studies.

resultsResNet50 outperformed other models, achieving a 5-fold cross-validation accuracy of 87 ± 2.2%. While VGG16 showed similar performance, it exhibited higher uncertainty. In the testing phase, the pretrained ResNet50 excelled in classifying non-FLL, cysts, and FFS. To compare with other research, ResNet50 surpassed the prior methods like two-layered feed-forward neural networks (FFNN) and CNN+ReLU in FLL diagnosis.

conclusionResNet50 exhibited good performance in FLL diagnosis, especially for HCC classification, suggesting its potential for developing computer-aided FLL diagnosis. However, further refinement is required for HCC and HMG classification in future studies.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularCystsLiver NeoplasmsHumansNeural Networks, ComputerRetrospective Studiesconvolutional neural networkfocal liver lesionshepatocellular carcinomaResNet50ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID37991141
PMCPMC10795428

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.